Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
GAME LENGTH: IS IT POSSIBLE TO MAKE YOUR GAME TOO LONG?
Posts
Addit
View playlists
CloseYes, although I may be in the minority here.
I’ve played a couple of commercial RPG’s that have tend to have taken me more than 40 hours+ just to complete the main quest and none of the side quests or optional bosses / dungeons. One RPG actually took me 80 hours just to finish the main game (Star Ocean: Till The End Of Time). So I’ve played my fair share of extremely long games. When I was younger and played a lot more video games, I didn’t seriously mind this; more bang for my buck, you know, something I really like about buying / playing RPG’s. But as I’ve gotten older and with the emergence of indie games and more and more different types of games to play, I generally have grown apart from playing RPG’s that take me an extremely long time. Maybe it’s just an age thing.
Kentona has a point about how some games can get too boring after a specific amount of time, especially if it’s extremely formulaic. I mean, I hate the whole town, dungeon, town, dungeon step-by-step process with nothing to break it from that ever-repeating cycle. If it’s going to be a long game, it better provide me as much of a different experience with each playthrough throughout.
When it comes to making your own creations, shorter is usually better here, especially if you want to actually complete your game. When I first started making games, I always wanted that big, long, epic adventure game from the days of my childhood. And that’s all great and all, but the likelihood of completing or having somebody actually finish playing that game is pretty much slim to nil. The best thing is to focus on making something shorter, generally a couple of hours long in length with a few towns or dungeons sprinkled in if you're making an RPG. It doesn't have to be the longest thing in world, just good enough to keep your audience entertained throughout the time.
So, if you wanna make a long ass RPG – be my guest! Is that necessary a good idea, especially if you're by yourself or trying to complete a game for a change? No.
But it’s all up to you. There’s a reason why most of the RPG games that have been completed on RMN are usually anywhere around 3 – 6 hours long. There may be a few 15 hour+ games on the site - but not a whole lot. And even those ones got worked on for years before they got to be that long.
I’ve played a couple of commercial RPG’s that have tend to have taken me more than 40 hours+ just to complete the main quest and none of the side quests or optional bosses / dungeons. One RPG actually took me 80 hours just to finish the main game (Star Ocean: Till The End Of Time). So I’ve played my fair share of extremely long games. When I was younger and played a lot more video games, I didn’t seriously mind this; more bang for my buck, you know, something I really like about buying / playing RPG’s. But as I’ve gotten older and with the emergence of indie games and more and more different types of games to play, I generally have grown apart from playing RPG’s that take me an extremely long time. Maybe it’s just an age thing.
Kentona has a point about how some games can get too boring after a specific amount of time, especially if it’s extremely formulaic. I mean, I hate the whole town, dungeon, town, dungeon step-by-step process with nothing to break it from that ever-repeating cycle. If it’s going to be a long game, it better provide me as much of a different experience with each playthrough throughout.
When it comes to making your own creations, shorter is usually better here, especially if you want to actually complete your game. When I first started making games, I always wanted that big, long, epic adventure game from the days of my childhood. And that’s all great and all, but the likelihood of completing or having somebody actually finish playing that game is pretty much slim to nil. The best thing is to focus on making something shorter, generally a couple of hours long in length with a few towns or dungeons sprinkled in if you're making an RPG. It doesn't have to be the longest thing in world, just good enough to keep your audience entertained throughout the time.
So, if you wanna make a long ass RPG – be my guest! Is that necessary a good idea, especially if you're by yourself or trying to complete a game for a change? No.
But it’s all up to you. There’s a reason why most of the RPG games that have been completed on RMN are usually anywhere around 3 – 6 hours long. There may be a few 15 hour+ games on the site - but not a whole lot. And even those ones got worked on for years before they got to be that long.
Housekeeping
3571
Well, upon reading this topic a few days after uploading a 50 hour rpg, I'm feeling really, really insecure.
@ Housekeeping – Really? Ha.
Well…don’t worry about it so much. At least you can say that you finished a 50 hour+ RPG, am I right? Besides, somebody will give it a try and enjoy it. But, lol, what a hilarious coincidence for that to happen and this topic pops up. Just curious, but how long did it take you to make that game?
EDIT: Nevermind, I found it, two years. Wow…
Well…don’t worry about it so much. At least you can say that you finished a 50 hour+ RPG, am I right? Besides, somebody will give it a try and enjoy it. But, lol, what a hilarious coincidence for that to happen and this topic pops up. Just curious, but how long did it take you to make that game?
EDIT: Nevermind, I found it, two years. Wow…
Housekeeping
3571
Yeah, two years, I KNOW.
I can tell where the shorter-is-better philosophy is coming from, though. I think for a lot of people here, the idea is either to earn your chops or build up an audience that could potentially support a commercial project. You can do that a lot faster by making solid quality games that are shorter, and people are generally more likely to pick those up because of the short time commitment. Like you, Addit, I wanted to do a riff on the epic RPGs of my childhood; I just didn't outgrow it.
Also, earlier in the thread Lockez mentioned that an RPG's length isn't dictated by its story. I disagree with that to an extent. Early RPGs were obviously not designed around the story, but even many SNES RPGs seemed to be designed around the story--FF6 and Chrono Trigger both stick out as being story-forward. When I made my game, too, I started with a story outline and built gameplay variances around it rather than starting with gameplay ideas and building the story around that. Whether I succeeded or failed is still up to the jury, I guess, so whether or not this philosophy holds any water has yet to be seen.
Personally, though, if I connect with characters, I prefer to stay with them for the long haul. Short games are a good way to get a quick audience and keep them engaged for the duration of the game, but short games are also much less memorable for me. It's the same thing with short stories vs. novels. A good short story can be impactful and have well-rounded characters, but a good novel will still have those things and can introduce a much greater level of complexity. They're both great forms that have a purpose, but, generally, society remembers and cherishes novels.
So, I guess all this is to say that you can add me to the "long games are fine" column. For me, boring gameplay is definitely going to hurt a long game, but, then again, I've played an MMO for years that has very little gameplay variance, and it keeps my interest just from slow progression and the friends I have on there. Likewise, an rpg with a good cast of characters and a sense of progression might be all I need to pull me through to the end. Obviously a GREAT game will do more than that, but that's all I need at any rate.
I can tell where the shorter-is-better philosophy is coming from, though. I think for a lot of people here, the idea is either to earn your chops or build up an audience that could potentially support a commercial project. You can do that a lot faster by making solid quality games that are shorter, and people are generally more likely to pick those up because of the short time commitment. Like you, Addit, I wanted to do a riff on the epic RPGs of my childhood; I just didn't outgrow it.
Also, earlier in the thread Lockez mentioned that an RPG's length isn't dictated by its story. I disagree with that to an extent. Early RPGs were obviously not designed around the story, but even many SNES RPGs seemed to be designed around the story--FF6 and Chrono Trigger both stick out as being story-forward. When I made my game, too, I started with a story outline and built gameplay variances around it rather than starting with gameplay ideas and building the story around that. Whether I succeeded or failed is still up to the jury, I guess, so whether or not this philosophy holds any water has yet to be seen.
Personally, though, if I connect with characters, I prefer to stay with them for the long haul. Short games are a good way to get a quick audience and keep them engaged for the duration of the game, but short games are also much less memorable for me. It's the same thing with short stories vs. novels. A good short story can be impactful and have well-rounded characters, but a good novel will still have those things and can introduce a much greater level of complexity. They're both great forms that have a purpose, but, generally, society remembers and cherishes novels.
So, I guess all this is to say that you can add me to the "long games are fine" column. For me, boring gameplay is definitely going to hurt a long game, but, then again, I've played an MMO for years that has very little gameplay variance, and it keeps my interest just from slow progression and the friends I have on there. Likewise, an rpg with a good cast of characters and a sense of progression might be all I need to pull me through to the end. Obviously a GREAT game will do more than that, but that's all I need at any rate.
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
Here's an excellent writing tip, courtesy of Gary Provost:
"This sentence has five words. Here are five more words. Five-word sentences are fine. But several together become monotonous. Listen to what is happening. The writing is getting boring. The sound of it drones. It's like a stuck record. The ear demands some variety. Now listen. I vary the sentence length, and I create music. Music. The writing sings. It has a pleasant rhythm, a lilt, a harmony. I use short sentences. And I use sentences of medium length. And sometimes, when I am certain the reader is rested, I will engage him with a sentence of considerable length, a sentence that burns with energy and builds with all the impetus of a crescendo, the roll of the drums, the crash of the cymbals–sounds that say listen to this, it is important."
OK? Understand?
Now apply that to gameplay.
The sentences are battles. They're dungeons. They're skills, cut scenes, towns with new shops, equipment upgrades you find in chests, and everything else in the game. Every aspect of the gameplay, to as much of a degree as is possible without breaking things, should try to aspire to create this same flowing rhythm, this music. This is what keeps it from dragging on. This is the difference between a game that feels like it was made according to a formula, and one that feels like it has a soul.
"This sentence has five words. Here are five more words. Five-word sentences are fine. But several together become monotonous. Listen to what is happening. The writing is getting boring. The sound of it drones. It's like a stuck record. The ear demands some variety. Now listen. I vary the sentence length, and I create music. Music. The writing sings. It has a pleasant rhythm, a lilt, a harmony. I use short sentences. And I use sentences of medium length. And sometimes, when I am certain the reader is rested, I will engage him with a sentence of considerable length, a sentence that burns with energy and builds with all the impetus of a crescendo, the roll of the drums, the crash of the cymbals–sounds that say listen to this, it is important."
OK? Understand?
Now apply that to gameplay.
The sentences are battles. They're dungeons. They're skills, cut scenes, towns with new shops, equipment upgrades you find in chests, and everything else in the game. Every aspect of the gameplay, to as much of a degree as is possible without breaking things, should try to aspire to create this same flowing rhythm, this music. This is what keeps it from dragging on. This is the difference between a game that feels like it was made according to a formula, and one that feels like it has a soul.
Long games are absolutely fine, but as always, I recommend getting some experience making shorter games first before embarking on a long one.
In RPG terms, building a game slowly gains you game development EXP. You get a little EXP every time you design a map, or tweak an item, or test a monster and adjust it until it feels just right. But there's a huge payoff at the end of it. Finishing a game gives you tons of bonus EXP. The bonus comes from finally seeing how all your tweaks and adjustments come together to form a solid whole greater than their parts, from the confidence of "I made a game!", and from having the tenacity to commit to a final project you're proud to show people.
Finishing short games is a great way to get this kind of experience quickly. You'll get less of the incremental stuff per game, but the bonus EXP of finishing is invaluable, especially if you haven't released many - or any - games before. Getting this EXP early means that when you kick off a really grand project, you'll be at a higher level and wasting less time on little mistakes.
To sum up this juvenile metaphor, you can grind gamiking EXP slowly on one colossal project, or you can get more EXP faster by finishing small games quickly for the "finisher bonus". That'll put you in a great position to start a big game, but it does mean waiting a little while.
In RPG terms, building a game slowly gains you game development EXP. You get a little EXP every time you design a map, or tweak an item, or test a monster and adjust it until it feels just right. But there's a huge payoff at the end of it. Finishing a game gives you tons of bonus EXP. The bonus comes from finally seeing how all your tweaks and adjustments come together to form a solid whole greater than their parts, from the confidence of "I made a game!", and from having the tenacity to commit to a final project you're proud to show people.
Finishing short games is a great way to get this kind of experience quickly. You'll get less of the incremental stuff per game, but the bonus EXP of finishing is invaluable, especially if you haven't released many - or any - games before. Getting this EXP early means that when you kick off a really grand project, you'll be at a higher level and wasting less time on little mistakes.
To sum up this juvenile metaphor, you can grind gamiking EXP slowly on one colossal project, or you can get more EXP faster by finishing small games quickly for the "finisher bonus". That'll put you in a great position to start a big game, but it does mean waiting a little while.
Now I feel incompetent upon reading Housekeeping's post. I took 2.5 years to make a 7 hour long gam. :\
Excellent analogy btw, LockeZ.
Excellent analogy btw, LockeZ.
Superpow
0
In my book, one hour of solid design and storytelling is worth much more than 100 sloppy, artificially-inflated hours of gameplay. A game's length, regardless of genre, ought to be dictated by its story arc and by the nature of its gameplay.
Regardless of game, the player will start seeing diminishing levels of enjoyment for every hour of gameplay past the first. This rate will either be very elastic if your story is uninspired and your gameplay repetitive and monotonous, or barely noticeable if you have constructed a cohesive plot with interesting gameplay hooks.
There is an archaic idea in game design that more is better, that quantity is indicative of overall quality. That cannot be further from the truth. Desired length ought not dictate the form of your gameplay and story.
I am not advocating short games over long games; such an argument is pointless. Rather, length ought to be largely dependent on the story you wish to tell and the gameplay you wish to create.
"Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away."
-Antoine de Saint-Exupery
Regardless of game, the player will start seeing diminishing levels of enjoyment for every hour of gameplay past the first. This rate will either be very elastic if your story is uninspired and your gameplay repetitive and monotonous, or barely noticeable if you have constructed a cohesive plot with interesting gameplay hooks.
There is an archaic idea in game design that more is better, that quantity is indicative of overall quality. That cannot be further from the truth. Desired length ought not dictate the form of your gameplay and story.
I am not advocating short games over long games; such an argument is pointless. Rather, length ought to be largely dependent on the story you wish to tell and the gameplay you wish to create.
"Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away."
-Antoine de Saint-Exupery
grindalf
3556
I dont actually have time to read all the comments so this might have already been covered.
I don't think a game can be to long as long as it stays interesting.
Once you can't think of new and interesting things to throw at the player its time to bring the game to an end.
I don't think a game can be to long as long as it stays interesting.
Once you can't think of new and interesting things to throw at the player its time to bring the game to an end.
